Here in Rochester NY, TW Cable offers cable modem at 2mbits download and 384kbps upload. Frontier (the local telco) offers DSL at 1mbit download, and 128kps download. Both for $40/month.
The way i see it there were two lines; they just discontinued one. The fact that they are changing who it is marketed to is not that big a deal. Its something thats been around a while, and they haven't changed it much. Changing the market or how many people have something doesn't mean the product is any better then when they didn't market in that way.
You say that XP won't be much of a change from win2k yet you still maintain that it is a huge change. wierd.
i looked over the review you pointed to. It seems to be the same as far as what it covers, and at the end he says 'he is blown away by it.' But then i doubt he's always blown away by the latest MS thing, which doesn't suprise me since very few articles give an honest opinion. I don't see how he is blown away by mostly cosmetic changes. And i never said it was a major step to.net, but it is a step. I'm not exactly sure how you can confirm it either, being that.net largely doesn't exist yet.
Well, its the expectation that MS built for themselves. I can hardly blame anyone for believing MS puts out shit; thats mostly what they have done.
Yes, win2k is finally a decent OS. But it still has its little problems that prevent me from calling it stable. Stable means being able to put my computer into standby and having all the devices work fine and i can access smb shares without problem when i wake it up. It means not 'forgetting' to shut of my monitor sometimes. It means not ignoring my first ctrl-alt-del to unlock the computer after it wakes up. It means not having errors in the logs about a performance library failing to load b/c of unknown problems in the library.
Sure, these things might be little. And quite honestly if these re the only problems with win2k, i'll gladly take that over win9x. Even if i can't run some win95 programs. But unfortunatly it still makes me a little paranoid; what else might it be 'forgetting' or screwing up thta i don't know about? Contrasting that to my linux box, which works the same, each and everytime.
I agree, it does seem like there isn't much new, except the gradual move to.net.
I got the impression from the article that this is mostly a facelift. They are reorganizing the start menu and folder windows, oh boy, just like the move from win3.1x to win95 (thats not to say that win95 didn't change alot of other stuff, but XP does not seem to be as much of a change).
Bind is installed for a default redhat install? I doubt that....but its been a while since i had to do an install. Bind-utils i'm sure is installed, as those are common tools. I believe it contains nslookup and similar things. If bind-utils were installed by default, there isn't a problem. And i doubt the named daemon is installed at all for a desktop. If it is, i doubt its even running, so little harm would be done.
Are you kidding me? Just what do you consider out of line? I really doubt you say ads for hardcore porn if you were looking for computer eqiupment. I use the internet everyday, and work for a web development company.
TV and the movies are different...but not by much. What do you think you'll see in an R rated movie anyway? Duh.
Back up your claim. Point me to websites that have banners that are 'way out of line.' Until you do, i have to believe you're either a troll, or have such uptight standards as to require women wear clothing that show no skin.
I doubt AIM is monitored at all. Thats why they provide the warn and block buttons. I doubt there's any policing there at all.
In AOL, there's a button on the IM window that you can use to send the IM to the TOS people, should someone say something you don't like. Otherwise i don't think they have the manpower to watch EVERY IM.
For another thing, the general populace likes to believe that porn is wrong
What i find amusing is that the people think that, yet they all like to buy it. Its why people got VCRs, CDROMs, and the Internet (at first, of course). Just look at the AOL article if you don't believe it.
Firstly, that you yourself didn't come to any harm - do we have any evidence supporting this? How do we know you're not now a psychopathic misogynist rapist who stalks innocent teenage girls, hoping to live out scenes depicted in hardcore pornography which shaped your adolescence?
I'm willing to believe him, just by the odds. A similar scenario is violent video games. Millions of kids play them, but that doesn't turn them into violent murders. And the few kids that end up in the news were already on the edge. I believe the same can be said for porn.
Secondly, you only consider the harm which porn may have caused you, without considering the harm that may have been caused to the people involved in producing the pornography. Also, you don't consider the harm that may have been caused to other people exposed to this porn. The sum total of these groups could have experienced significant harm.
Unless he's downloading something illegal, i doubt any harm came to those involved in making it. They got paid to do it, and did it of their own accord, and probably like it. (No, i don't buy that BS story, 'I had no choice.' McDonalds or your local grocery store are always hiring.)
As far as harming others; you don't just stumble onto porn, you have to go looking for it. Which to me implies it was something you wanted to see. Besides, i could claim someone is doing me harm when i see commercials with little kids in them; they make me sick, b/c rather then finding them cute, i find them disgusting b/c i know exactly what they are trying to do. Associate their product with cute. So why don't they take responsibility and pull all commercials with kids under 13.
In conclusion: you are not the only person affected by your actions, please learn to accept some responsibility for what you may have done
He has. And there really isn't much to do; he looked at an explicit picture. He's not responsible if the chic (or guy) in the pic hates what they are doing and hates themself for it. Thats their own stupidity. He's not responsible if someone else finds it offensive. They were disgusted, and got rid of it. At that point, its settled. And the person that goes around trying to act out what he sees is already fucked to begin with.
I agree; there are some redudant things, although i find the number to be small. As far as your comments on the editors goes; vi and pico would be your notepad or edit, while emacs would be an old version of visual studio. emacs is ALOT more then a simple text editor. I've heard rumors of what it can do...anyone here that has experience with it care to detail this for us?
That is something i've come to hate about installing redhat, is deselecting all the crap i don't want. Of course i'd rather have the option, unlike where in win2k it installs everything whether you want it or not.
There does need to be some kind of bare bones install; i would rather that, and then add what i want, then what it currently does. As far as the editors go, i ddin't think joe was installed by default. 3 isn't that many, and if you are complaining about having 3, why not complain about windows having 3 (the DOS edit..which is still in win2k), notepad, and wordpad.
We have yet to see how much the new.net stuff will cost. Also, you don't have to subscribe to the update service. You can still update for free by other means.
Linux is bloated? Thats rich. I can't speak for the suse distro, but i can fit redhat into 400 megs, and thats with X. Now compare that to win2k. 800MB, and there isn't anything i can do to slim that down. After service pack one, my winnt directory by itself is 1GB. And alot of win components went into the program files folder.
So what linux tools do you need that makes it so bloated?
I'd rather get the boxed set myself. Honestly i think charging $9 for updates is stupid; especially since of late i've found quite a few packages to be broken. For example, the ssh2 packages didn't work with my ssh client on windows, and i could not ssh to or from my linux box from or to my school. Something was wrong with the package, b/c when i built everything from the source, the problem went away.
You could call them foolish or ignorant. Yet i don't think that you have disproved their beliefs. Are you so arrogant that you cannot accept the possibility that they may in fact be right? Its possible you know.
Ahh, but there are tons of experiments to look for any miraculous happenings, or any magical "faith" based healing, whatever. One CAN prove God exists -- seeing large numbers of miraculous cancer heals when people prayed would be one such simple proof.
I hardly think that would prove that god existed. Are these people also going for cancer treatment? Maybe the body found a way to fight the cancer itself. Some people seem immune to heartattacks, why not cancer?
Also, lets not forget that alot of people DO pray, but their prayers go unanswered.
Slashdot Mirror
128k upload that is..
Here in Rochester NY, TW Cable offers cable modem at 2mbits download and 384kbps upload. Frontier (the local telco) offers DSL at 1mbit download, and 128kps download. Both for $40/month.
The way i see it there were two lines; they just discontinued one. The fact that they are changing who it is marketed to is not that big a deal. Its something thats been around a while, and they haven't changed it much. Changing the market or how many people have something doesn't mean the product is any better then when they didn't market in that way.
.net, but it is a step. I'm not exactly sure how you can confirm it either, being that .net largely doesn't exist yet.
You say that XP won't be much of a change from win2k yet you still maintain that it is a huge change. wierd.
i looked over the review you pointed to. It seems to be the same as far as what it covers, and at the end he says 'he is blown away by it.' But then i doubt he's always blown away by the latest MS thing, which doesn't suprise me since very few articles give an honest opinion. I don't see how he is blown away by mostly cosmetic changes. And i never said it was a major step to
Why do so many anonymous cowards have nothing of value to add?
Even thought it should have been done long ago. Besides, most people won't know the difference, and i bet alot use NT already at work.
. html?tag=st.sw.429669-8-5194258-2.arrow.429669-8-5 194258-3. Thats where i got the .net stuff from. Its the third page of the article, maybe you should try reading it.
Anyway what i meant was going from 2000 to XP is like going from win95 to win98. Nothing much to see.
http://www.cnet.com/software/0-429669-8-5194258-3
Well, its the expectation that MS built for themselves. I can hardly blame anyone for believing MS puts out shit; thats mostly what they have done.
Yes, win2k is finally a decent OS. But it still has its little problems that prevent me from calling it stable. Stable means being able to put my computer into standby and having all the devices work fine and i can access smb shares without problem when i wake it up. It means not 'forgetting' to shut of my monitor sometimes. It means not ignoring my first ctrl-alt-del to unlock the computer after it wakes up. It means not having errors in the logs about a performance library failing to load b/c of unknown problems in the library.
Sure, these things might be little. And quite honestly if these re the only problems with win2k, i'll gladly take that over win9x. Even if i can't run some win95 programs. But unfortunatly it still makes me a little paranoid; what else might it be 'forgetting' or screwing up thta i don't know about? Contrasting that to my linux box, which works the same, each and everytime.
I have 128MB ram, and it doesn't 'swap like mad.' It swaps when i have ALOT of things going at once.
Now the HD size is another matter; a fresh install takes 800MB. That is alot.
Can't comment on the kde thing; i use gnome myself. But i do keep kde around to try now and then.
I agree, it does seem like there isn't much new, except the gradual move to .net.
I got the impression from the article that this is mostly a facelift. They are reorganizing the start menu and folder windows, oh boy, just like the move from win3.1x to win95 (thats not to say that win95 didn't change alot of other stuff, but XP does not seem to be as much of a change).
Uh, where did you see that little fact?
Bind is installed for a default redhat install? I doubt that....but its been a while since i had to do an install. Bind-utils i'm sure is installed, as those are common tools. I believe it contains nslookup and similar things. If bind-utils were installed by default, there isn't a problem. And i doubt the named daemon is installed at all for a desktop. If it is, i doubt its even running, so little harm would be done.
I agree w/you 100%. Education will go all the way to solve the worlds social problems.
Not many home users or desktop people would be running bind...
Ok, i could see how this might be flaimbait. But it is honestly the attitude i see with most middle class americans aged 35-50.
Are you kidding me? Just what do you consider out of line? I really doubt you say ads for hardcore porn if you were looking for computer eqiupment. I use the internet everyday, and work for a web development company.
TV and the movies are different...but not by much. What do you think you'll see in an R rated movie anyway? Duh.
Back up your claim. Point me to websites that have banners that are 'way out of line.' Until you do, i have to believe you're either a troll, or have such uptight standards as to require women wear clothing that show no skin.
I doubt AIM is monitored at all. Thats why they provide the warn and block buttons. I doubt there's any policing there at all.
In AOL, there's a button on the IM window that you can use to send the IM to the TOS people, should someone say something you don't like. Otherwise i don't think they have the manpower to watch EVERY IM.
He's growing up with his own P2/300 with DSL access in his bedroom.
If the idiots are so worried about what he's doing online, why does the DSL go to his bedroom??
For another thing, the general populace likes to believe that porn is wrong
What i find amusing is that the people think that, yet they all like to buy it. Its why people got VCRs, CDROMs, and the Internet (at first, of course). Just look at the AOL article if you don't believe it.
Firstly, that you yourself didn't come to any harm - do we have any evidence supporting this? How do we know you're not now a psychopathic misogynist rapist who stalks innocent teenage girls, hoping to live out scenes depicted in hardcore pornography which shaped your adolescence?
I'm willing to believe him, just by the odds. A similar scenario is violent video games. Millions of kids play them, but that doesn't turn them into violent murders. And the few kids that end up in the news were already on the edge. I believe the same can be said for porn.
Secondly, you only consider the harm which porn may have caused you, without considering the harm that may have been caused to the people involved in producing the pornography. Also, you don't consider the harm that may have been caused to other people exposed to this porn. The sum total of these groups could have experienced significant harm.
Unless he's downloading something illegal, i doubt any harm came to those involved in making it. They got paid to do it, and did it of their own accord, and probably like it. (No, i don't buy that BS story, 'I had no choice.' McDonalds or your local grocery store are always hiring.)
As far as harming others; you don't just stumble onto porn, you have to go looking for it. Which to me implies it was something you wanted to see. Besides, i could claim someone is doing me harm when i see commercials with little kids in them; they make me sick, b/c rather then finding them cute, i find them disgusting b/c i know exactly what they are trying to do. Associate their product with cute. So why don't they take responsibility and pull all commercials with kids under 13.
In conclusion: you are not the only person affected by your actions, please learn to accept some responsibility for what you may have done
He has. And there really isn't much to do; he looked at an explicit picture. He's not responsible if the chic (or guy) in the pic hates what they are doing and hates themself for it. Thats their own stupidity. He's not responsible if someone else finds it offensive. They were disgusted, and got rid of it. At that point, its settled. And the person that goes around trying to act out what he sees is already fucked to begin with.
I agree; there are some redudant things, although i find the number to be small. As far as your comments on the editors goes; vi and pico would be your notepad or edit, while emacs would be an old version of visual studio. emacs is ALOT more then a simple text editor. I've heard rumors of what it can do...anyone here that has experience with it care to detail this for us?
Yes, talking about food production on a story about food production is off topic..
That is something i've come to hate about installing redhat, is deselecting all the crap i don't want. Of course i'd rather have the option, unlike where in win2k it installs everything whether you want it or not.
There does need to be some kind of bare bones install; i would rather that, and then add what i want, then what it currently does. As far as the editors go, i ddin't think joe was installed by default. 3 isn't that many, and if you are complaining about having 3, why not complain about windows having 3 (the DOS edit..which is still in win2k), notepad, and wordpad.
We have yet to see how much the new .net stuff will cost. Also, you don't have to subscribe to the update service. You can still update for free by other means.
Linux is bloated? Thats rich. I can't speak for the suse distro, but i can fit redhat into 400 megs, and thats with X. Now compare that to win2k. 800MB, and there isn't anything i can do to slim that down. After service pack one, my winnt directory by itself is 1GB. And alot of win components went into the program files folder.
So what linux tools do you need that makes it so bloated?
I'd rather get the boxed set myself. Honestly i think charging $9 for updates is stupid; especially since of late i've found quite a few packages to be broken. For example, the ssh2 packages didn't work with my ssh client on windows, and i could not ssh to or from my linux box from or to my school. Something was wrong with the package, b/c when i built everything from the source, the problem went away.
You could call them foolish or ignorant. Yet i don't think that you have disproved their beliefs. Are you so arrogant that you cannot accept the possibility that they may in fact be right? Its possible you know.
Ahh, but there are tons of experiments to look for any miraculous happenings, or any magical "faith" based healing, whatever. One CAN prove God exists -- seeing large numbers of miraculous cancer heals when people prayed would be one such simple proof.
I hardly think that would prove that god existed. Are these people also going for cancer treatment? Maybe the body found a way to fight the cancer itself. Some people seem immune to heartattacks, why not cancer?
Also, lets not forget that alot of people DO pray, but their prayers go unanswered.
So i don't think that's any proof.